The Kickstarter campaign that was "shut down" now has a green light.

The Kickstarter campaign that was "shut down" by Apple for creating a charging station that had both Lightning and 30-pin iPod connectors wasn't following the specifications required to be part of Apple's "Made for iPod" (MFi) program, according to Apple. Still, Apple has reviewed the specifications and has apparently reversed course on those restrictions, telling Ars on Friday that it has decided to allow 30-pin and Lightning connectors side-by-side for charging purposes.

"Our technical specifications provide clear guidelines for developing accessories and they are available to MFi licensees for free. We support accessories that integrate USB and Lightning connectors, but there were technical issues that prevented accessories from integrating 30-pin and Lightning connectors, so our guidelines did not allow this," Apple spokesperson Tom Neumayr told Ars on Friday. "We have been working to resolve this and have updated our guidelines to allow accessories to integrate both 30-pin and Lightning connectors to support charging."

The incident highlights some of the problems accessory creators can face when using Kickstarter to fund yet-to-be-created projects—especially as they relate to Apple accessories. Earlier on Friday when we spoke to James Siminoff, the creator of the POP Kickstarter campaign, he explained that the timing of the iPhone 5 announcement (and its related introduction of the new Lightning connector) is what threw the whole project for a loop.

"We were already a member of the MFi program before the release of the iPhone 5. When we came out with the project, one of the biggest questions we got was whether we'd support the iPhone 5, and we said 'absolutely,'" Siminoff told Ars. "At the time, there was no reason to think that they would change the way in which they're selling [the MFi program]."

That is, Siminoff and his company didn't expect Apple to make changes to the restrictions placed on the MFi spec—he says previously, Apple didn't have language that would have prohibited an Apple connector to be sold in a product alongside another connector. But eventually Apple did begin to issue new guidelines that said Lightning connectors couldn't be included alongside any other kind of connector—30-pin or otherwise. Siminoff says his company interpreted this as not applying to their product.

"They started to come out with guidelines, and there was one that said Lightning would not be allowed in any product that has 30-pin," he said. "We didn't clarify if that was for chargers or a docking station—we assumed the latter—so while we saw it, it didn't seem to make sense for what we were doing that they would not allow these two things to be on the same device."

Siminoff went on: "Maybe we should've seen that and decided that we can't make [the POP charger]. But it didn't make any rational sense. At the same time, they were changing things, updating the policies, so we said, 'OK we'll submit the project [to the MFi program] and see what happens.'"

What happened was that Apple eventually turned the application down for not following the updated MFi spec. As such, Siminoff made the decision this week to cancel the project altogether rather than modify it to allow users to plug in their own Lightning cables because it simply wouldn't have been the product that he originally wanted to produce.

"We got very strong feedback saying we should still make a product that just has USB," Siminoff told Ars before Apple decided to update its guidelines, "but I still feel good about the decision to just refund everyone's money, because we just wanted to make a product that we believed in."

A product they "believe in" would include clean lines and easy-to-use cables coming from a single charging station, not adapters and ports that users need to plug things into, said Siminoff. That's exactly why Siminoff remains skeptical of Apple's apparent reversal of its decision to bar the combination of 30-pin and Lightning connectors; what about Lightning alongside other connectors?

"If it has to be an Apple-only product, and Lightning can't be next to, say, an Android charger, then it's still not something we want to make, Siminoff said after hearing the news about Apple's updated guidelines. "I hope they become customer friendly. Maybe we will be able to do [the POP charger] after all."

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

70 Reader Comments

We support accessories that integrate USB and Lightning connectors, but there were technical issues that prevented accessories from integrating 30-pin and Lightning connectors, so our guidelines did not allow this

Yes, terribly difficult, I'm sure. Right up there with curing cancer and developing room temperature fusion. Who do they think will buy these lines?

Wow, sales of the iPhone5 must be really below expectations given all the recent Apple moves?

And in other news..."The latest smartphone sales data from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech shows Apple has achieved its highest ever share in the US (53.3%) in the latest 12 weeks*, with the iPhone 5 helping to boost sales."Apple achieves its highest ever Smartphone share in US

Can you imagine how high Apple's share in the US will be if the iPhone 5 wasn't selling so badly?

Wow, sales of the iPhone5 must be really below expectations given all the recent Apple moves?

Don't think this is the reason since all with iPhone 5 breaking every previous record sales and bringing Apple US market share > 50% for the first time. I think this friendlier and more reasonable Apple is due to Cook replacing Jobs as CEO.

I saw somewhere else that they ate something like $11K in credit card fees and processing fees through charging and refunding the money. I hope there's a way out of this that doesn't involved them paying a lot of fees.

Even if I had an iDevice with 30-pin and/or new Lightning connector I wouldn't get that charging device. It looks rather large and bulky for what it is. I'd rather something that'd be easier to fit in a bag well (for the battery based one), so something rectangular would be better. For the one that's plugged into the wall, still somewhat large and odd shaped, but I can see where it'd be decent enough on a desk, or when branded for a cafe or bar or something.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

"They started to come out with guidelines, and there was one that said Lightning would not be allowed in any product that has 30-pin," he said. "We didn't clarify if that was for chargers or a docking station—we assumed the latter—so while we saw it, it didn't seem to make sense for what we were doing that they would not allow these two things to be on the same device."

So they couldn't be bothered to contact Apple to confirm whether or not the new guidelines applied to them?

Even if I had an iDevice with 30-pin and/or new Lightning connector I wouldn't get that charging device. It looks rather large and bulky for what it is. I'd rather something that'd be easier to fit in a bag well (for the battery based one), so something rectangular would be better. For the one that's plugged into the wall, still somewhat large and odd shaped, but I can see where it'd be decent enough on a desk, or when branded for a cafe or bar or something.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

Induction is so yesterday, brah. That dude with the funny mustache and dapper 'do was doing that like back in the 1890's.

James Siminoff just got called out on his con. He simply doesn't want to make the device. He is much more interested in blaming Apple for stopping his production and using this to market his own alternative to Kickstarter. His original product pitch didn't even depend on lightning adapters, it was going to use micro usb.

James Siminoff just got called out on his con. He simply doesn't want to make the device. He is much more interested in blaming Apple for stopping his production and using this to market his own alternative to Kickstarter. His original product pitch didn't even depend on lightning adapters, it was going to use micro usb.

Bang on. The original product spec never included lightening and they added it after fully funded. Then, when Apple rejected the change James used it to create a bit of a media hype and promote his new Kickstarter clone Christie Street by using it to issue the refunds....

The bottom line is that James Siminoff has decided more money to be made by launching a Kickstarter clone then to actually develop the project he collected money to originally provide - and he is using Apple/Lightening as an excuse.

Customers could then have plugged 30 pin, lightening or even bog standard USB cables into the thing and it wouldn't have required any "approval" from Apple.

Honestly, the retractable cables were the only redeeming quality that might justify this device. It was $99 for the basic version that plugged into the wall. If you want 4 USB ports coming from the wall, you can get this for $5. That's a massive price difference for just an aesthetic difference.

EDIT: I just realized after posting this that the item I linked plugs into a USB port, not the wall. It doesn't change the point that $99 is a LOT.

It seems like Apple wants to hide the fact that their lightning connector is USB 2.0.

After all, if accessories can provide the same features to devices using micro USB 2.0 or even their old dock connector, then some of the trademark Apple magic is lost.

Why would they want to do that? Apple never claimed that the new Lightning connector was faster. The fact is, the Lightning connector is better than micro USB or their previous 30 pin connector as it can be plugged in either way, it is much stronger and durable and it supports higher capacity charging devices.

Wow, sales of the iPhone5 must be really below expectations given all the recent Apple moves?

And in other news..."The latest smartphone sales data from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech shows Apple has achieved its highest ever share in the US (53.3%) in the latest 12 weeks*, with the iPhone 5 helping to boost sales."Apple achieves its highest ever Smartphone share in US

Can you imagine how high Apple's share in the US will be if the iPhone 5 wasn't selling so badly?

Kantar reports are horrible. It is share of items sold during a short Window of time. This is the same group that said the S3 was the best selling phone when the S3 was released. And now they have magical data that show the iPhone sold the most phones when the new iPhone was released?

Note their reports have nothing to do with actual market share but % of devices sold during that particular window .

Wow, sales of the iPhone5 must be really below expectations given all the recent Apple moves?

And in other news..."The latest smartphone sales data from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech shows Apple has achieved its highest ever share in the US (53.3%) in the latest 12 weeks*, with the iPhone 5 helping to boost sales."Apple achieves its highest ever Smartphone share in US

Can you imagine how high Apple's share in the US will be if the iPhone 5 wasn't selling so badly?

Kantar reports are horrible. It is share of items sold during a short Window of time. This is the same group that said the S3 was the best selling phone when the S3 was released. And now they have magical data that show the iPhone sold the most phones when the new iPhone was released?

Note their reports have nothing to do with actual market share but % of devices sold during that particular window .

I agree with your points. I guess we'll have to wait for the quarterly sales reports to be out to be sure.

James Siminoff just got called out on his con. He simply doesn't want to make the device. He is much more interested in blaming Apple for stopping his production and using this to market his own alternative to Kickstarter. His original product pitch didn't even depend on lightning adapters, it was going to use micro usb.

More likely they saw what happened to other Kickstarter projects for Apple accessories when Lightning was announced and rendered them obsolete. Some of the backers of those were baying for blood.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

Induction charging isn't as great as some think. It's inefficient, more expensive, needs a stand or plate the device goes on. And guess what? It's not wireless. You still need to plug the charger into the wall. It's just as much trouble to put the device down the proper way as it is to plug it in.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

Ive talked about that recently. It's in a video and mentioned in some articles. The gist is they didn't want to introduce a third object/device into the equation that would add more complexity. IIRC (I'm not 100% sure on this) they felt they'd have to offer both options - induction and not - and that's complexity they don't want.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

It would make the phone heavier and thicker and more expensive to manufacture.

"If it has to be an Apple-only product, and Lightning can't be next to, say, an Android charger, then it's still not something we want to make, Siminoff said after hearing the news about Apple's updated guidelines. "I hope they become customer friendly. Maybe we will be able to do [the POP charger] after all."

Edit: Incidentally, you missed a quotation mark, Jacqui. Right after "… then it's still not something we want to make."

neozebra wrote:

And in other news..."The latest smartphone sales data from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech shows Apple has achieved its highest ever share in the US (53.3%) in the latest 12 weeks*, with the iPhone 5 helping to boost sales."Apple achieves its highest ever Smartphone share in US

Can you imagine how high Apple's share in the US will be if the iPhone 5 wasn't selling so badly?

Can you imagine how high it would be if nearly three of the twelve weeks covered by the report weren't before the iPhone 5 actually launched?

Also, they note that across the "big five" countries in Europe, Samsung had the greatest share with 44.3% of sales, while Apple came second with only 25.3% of sales. But the only countries in Europe to get a Sep. 21 launch of the iPhone 5 were the UK, Germany, and France. Spain and Italy didn't get it until a week later.

Shudder wrote:

Note their reports have nothing to do with actual market share but % of devices sold during that particular window .

They measure sales performance during a small window, not share of the market at a given point in time, that would be installed base in PC terms. You can sell 50% of the phones sold in the past month but still have 5% market share of smartphones in use.

Both are valid ways of measuring market share. (Trust me, Apple, Sammy, and friends are just as interested in how they did on Black Friday as well as their share of the installed base.) The report makes it quite clear that they're discussing share of sales during the reporting period, so I'm not understanding the quibbling here.

And in other news..."The latest smartphone sales data from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech shows Apple has achieved its highest ever share in the US (53.3%) in the latest 12 weeks*, with the iPhone 5 helping to boost sales."Apple achieves its highest ever Smartphone share in US

Can you imagine how high Apple's share in the US will be if the iPhone 5 wasn't selling so badly?

Kantar reports are horrible. It is share of items sold during a short Window of time.

Yeah, 12 weeks are much to short - it takes at least a full quarter of 13 weeks to get a real impression.

Shudder wrote:

Note their reports have nothing to do with actual market share but % of devices sold during that particular window .

It seems like Apple wants to hide the fact that their lightning connector is USB 2.0.

No, it isn't. That's like saying that PCI Express is only USB 2.0 because there's a USB 2.0 hub in one of its slots.

Lightning is an interesting adaptation that supports whatever Apple will need going forward for some time. Right now it breaks out to USB 2.0, HDMI, analog audio, and a couple of other things. There's nothing stopping Apple from adding USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt or Firewire or whatever's the hot new kid in town in the future if they want to, and they won't have to worry about changing connectors or breaking accessories anymore, which was holding them back with the 30-pin.

That's one of the key benefits of Lightning. An actual USB 2.0-based system can never be anything else.

Quote:

After all, if accessories can provide the same features to devices using micro USB 2.0

They can't. USB allows for two things: (1) data transfer between a host and client, and (2) charging. It doesn't provide direct digital audio or video connections, analog output, device control, track information, etc. It also doesn't provide the kind of future-proofing that Lightning does.

Like DisplayPort and Thunderbolt, it's switching to a packet-based communications protocol that can be whatever it needs to be without issue. It would have been nice if Lightning were an open standard like the those two so that all smartphones could benefit, but the world will survive with Apple keeping some things for itself.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer.

That's a really good move from Apple but I hope someone sues the guys for the money the devs must have lost on the project. This is exactly the kind of crazy authoritative mindset that anarchists hate. Apple needs to evolve at least after Jobs.

It seems like Apple wants to hide the fact that their lightning connector is USB 2.0.

After all, if accessories can provide the same features to devices using micro USB 2.0 or even their old dock connector, then some of the trademark Apple magic is lost.

Why would they want to do that? Apple never claimed that the new Lightning connector was faster. The fact is, the Lightning connector is better than micro USB or their previous 30 pin connector as it can be plugged in either way, it is much stronger and durable and it supports higher capacity charging devices.

While physically a better connection in the sense that it functions well, I think when discussing a "connection" between a device and your ability to easily and cheaply buy cables that connect to it, you have to consider convenience as part of the "better" argument.

In that sense, I think Lightning is not better. I'd prefer Apple let me use one of the myriad of USB cable standards instead of proprietary nonsense. For my purposes, THAT would be "better."

They probably knew that they were bucking for a lawsuit if they didn't allow this. Specifications are fine, but when you are just extending those specifications and adding extra functionality..... the specifications should NOT keep the thing in question from getting certified.

It seems like Apple wants to hide the fact that their lightning connector is USB 2.0.

After all, if accessories can provide the same features to devices using micro USB 2.0 or even their old dock connector, then some of the trademark Apple magic is lost.

Why would they want to do that? Apple never claimed that the new Lightning connector was faster. The fact is, the Lightning connector is better than micro USB or their previous 30 pin connector as it can be plugged in either way, it is much stronger and durable and it supports higher capacity charging devices.

While physically a better connection in the sense that it functions well, I think when discussing a "connection" between a device and your ability to easily and cheaply buy cables that connect to it, you have to consider convenience as part of the "better" argument.

In that sense, I think Lightning is not better. I'd prefer Apple let me use one of the myriad of USB cable standards instead of proprietary nonsense. For my purposes, THAT would be "better."

I completely disagree.

You mention "a myriad of USB cable standards" - that's part of the problem.

How many "lightning standards" are there? If some tech-unfamiliar person walks into a store, and says they need a lightning cable, how likely are they to buy the wrong one?

That's a really good move from Apple but I hope someone sues the guys for the money the devs must have lost on the project. This is exactly the kind of crazy authoritative mindset that anarchists hate. Apple needs to evolve at least after Jobs.

If you look at the history then you'll see that they attempted to add lightning after the kickstarter concluded. As soon as he ran into an issue he killed the project and directed people to his kickstarter competitor to get refunds. He also used this to get PR for his new competitor site. The whole thing is BS.

It sounds to me more like as soon as they got some pushback from Apple he pulled the trigger. Apple meanwhile was reviewing things and came to a final decision to allow the integration for whatever reason.

Both are valid ways of measuring market share. (Trust me, Apple, Sammy, and friends are just as interested in how they did on Black Friday as well as their share of the installed base.) The report makes it quite clear that they're discussing share of sales during the reporting period, so I'm not understanding the quibbling here.

Because people constantly misquote Kantar in the news and it's annoying. Normal people understand the scope of the report but most sites just run with a headline that people misinterpret.

My biggest issue is they keep doing these right after a phone is released and it's just common sense that the new phone will have the most sales. This isn't like other industries where the product has been out a while and recent sales will show what's going on.

How hard would it be to hide an induction coil inside the iDevices? It can literally be a paper thin flex circuit with the coil printed on it. Or it could be integrated into the case itself. Yes efficiency yada yada yada. The smartphone battery charging uses so little power anyway it would not make any appreciable difference. Also, I'd be more likely to charge my devices if I could just throw them onto a common charger. I wouldn't care if it took a little longer. And if I were in a hurry we'd still have the wired charging to fall back on.

Probably not very. Considering the only other phone in recent memory with similar capabilities to try this was the Palm Pre and that did so well.